Thursday, October 24, 2013

Have you ever seen Channing Tatum act? For each of his films that I’ve accidentally
watched, I think I wished for death for the first 6 hours of the movie. What?
Movies are rarely longer than 2 hours? Well, you could have fooled me. Now you think I’ve just not seen the right
movies? Dude, I know them all: The one
where he danced. The one where he kissed a girl. The one where he grabbed a girl and gritted
out, “love me!” The one where he kissed a girl then grabbed her but didn't say
with his dead eyes, “love me!” The one
where he kissed a girl. The one where he
kissed that girl that should die b/c her existence and subsequent pairing with Channing Tatum made
me realize that life was a cruel joke. The
one where he kissed a girl that was Rachel McAdams and I still hated him. The one where he kissed another girl. And GI Joe.

I
hate him :(

P.s.
yes, I have seen him and I admit that I may
be the only heterosexual female in the entire world that does not find him
attractive... Yes, THAT Channing Tatum:

There is a certain demographic of human (cough-cough malewhitemale...) that, when confronted with either (a) irrefutable proof of its privilege and the embarrassment of opportunities afforded said demographic due to such privilege or (b) bigotry, will do anything or say anything to dismiss, trivialize, attempt to negate, or minimize such claims.Whenever I am faced with a representative of such demographic as they demean the experiences of the historically marginalized, I feel something akin to unbridled disgust- I-could-spit-on-you type of disgust.During a Demo Day tech event, Jorge Cortell tweeted the following picture:

(image source)In addition, when confronted with how insulting (and, may I add, misogynist) his picture was, Jorge proceeds to call the woman stupid. So not only does she not have brains, she is stupid. Winner.But we are not here to focus on Jorge Cortell, a breed of man on which I usually try to spare not more than a few breaths because what else is his disease but small d*ck syndrome? We are here to discuss a commenter to an article posted by Nitasha Tiku of Valley Wag, which lambasted Jorge Cortell for his sexist tweet and which appropriately states: "Brainpower, it appears, was also conspicuously absent when Cortell tried to measure intellectual rigor by the bottom of woman's shoe." A commenter, however, attacks Ms. Tiku's article to say,

"This had nothing to do about women until you decided to make it about women...

He was simply stating facts about how high heels are bad for your health, and in turn that makes you stupid for wearing them.

The same could be said about cigarettes and smokers. Just because it is mainly women wearing high heels does not mean he was attacking women. He was attacking high heels."

The commenter, some fool named "Fairplaythrowaway", really really just did say that. Calling a wearer of high heels stupid and without brains is not an attack on women?? Like, legitimately and truly, you really did just say that? Besides women and drag queens, who else wears high heels? Please explain this to me? I doubt I'd be far off when I say that 99% of wearers of high heels ARE women. So who on earth is he referring to? And so I refer you back to my opening paragraph where I say that people will do ANYTHING to deny bigotry and prejudice. Because for them to accept that it does exist means that they have to take a closer look at themselves and clearly, they would not like what they see in the mirror. I am disgusted. Like, spit-on-you disgusted.

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Below are screen captures of portions of a Facebook conversation from the wall of a friend:

So what is the point of this JustMarvy post? In a word, responsibility. The lovely individual highlighted in pink (and nicknamed Pinky for the purposes of this blog) is a frequent commenter on the posts of my friend. Pinky never fails to make himself known as the most bigoted, hateful, and angry individual in the world. Case in point, an epic comment string in which Pinky raved and ranted against sexual assault victims, and arguing that rape statistics are falsified due to his numerous friends currently imprisoned due to false rape accusations... ... ... And do not get him started on anything gay. By the time you're done reading one of his vitriol-filled rants against members of the gay community, you end up feeling sad for a society that has created a man so closeted that the only way he can live with himself is to hate those who are able to live so freely or who have the courage to do so.

Before I digress any further, I return to the topic of responsibility. My friend prides himself on having friends from all backgrounds and who have opinions as diverse as can be. My friend, as such, freely permits his friends to post as they will on his Facebook posts, and often engages in the most lively debates with them. However, I believe that there is a limit to what one should allow on their turf before it becomes a justifiable third-party belief that the "turf owner", by extension, is the author of such views and is the one spreading and espousing the views that are expressed on that turf. Look above at Pinky's comments to the case of a judge changing a baby's name from Messiah to Martin. What, at all, do the facts of the case have to do with being black (or any race, for that matter) or being uneducated? The rest of the comments (not posted) descend into the usual "let's attack black people" madness and all with no moderation or otherwise from my friend. To which I now say to him and all other similarly-behaving people: At what point are you required to put a stop to "fuckeduppery"? As I've said before, opinions can be wrong and people should NOT be given a platform to spread their hate or their ignorance. So dear friend, it's your wall and by constantly allowing Pinky access to it and allowing him the opportunity to put people of various races, religions, cultures, sexual persuasions, etc. down, you ARE just as ignorant and as at fault as he is. I've watched as you stayed silent while he, unfettered, offered his opinions on rape and his belief that some rapists are misunderstood, and I've watched you stay silent as he preached that there are people who need to have the gay beat out of them. Please don't give me the argument of life and opinions and things being composed primarily of grey areas- I am quite certain that you understand the concept of hate; therefore it is your job to stop the hate- Stop him. Whether or not you agree, To stop him IS your responsibility. And don't you dare call his nonsense free speech because that actually does have imposed limits.

Tuesday, August 6, 2013

In what may be the CRAZIEST thing I've read about this week month, a group of unbelievably ridiculously insanely misguided Bushwick-based hipsters (*spit!) held a meeting to protest...wait for it...Gentrification. Motherf*cking gentrification... In Bushwick, New York.No, you did not read that incorrectly. And what do these concerned citizens look like?

The nerve, the gall... processing this involves a level of acceptance of misguided privilege of which even I am not capable.In the end, I can only muster up the following:

Thursday, July 25, 2013

Does anyone
remember that Sex and the City season 5 episode in which Carrie suffered from horrifying
writer’s block, leading her to contemplate writing a column entitled “Socks and
the City” where she wrote about her sock drawer and compared men to socks.

Probably the
dumbest article ever, right? FALSE. A writer for The Atlantic, Owen Strachan,
clearly had an indomitable case of writer’s block when he wrote a full-length
article discussing the “inhumanness” of abortion and abortion rights as
indicated by the use of the term “the Royal Baby” to refer to Prince William
and Catherine Middleton’s newborn.

Monday, July 15, 2013

- Obama's statement on the verdict initially annoyed, because he made it about gun control. On further reflection, I think he has a point. Florida being a gun-loving state has some lawsin place that make things skewed favorably towards the person who pulls the trigger in any scenario. It is highly doubtful Zimmerman would have walked in a state that was less favorable towards guns.

- For the first time in my life, I worry about my younger brother. He has often talked about how he is stopped a million times while driving in his home city of Dallas. He has always shrugged it off as a mere symptom of being black while driving. But for me, it is now a little frightening to think he could also be senselessly killed, merely by running into the wrong person at the wrong time. Such a thing bothers me because I really like that kid. He's fun to have around.

- Last night I watched Fruitvale Station. Frutitvale Station is based on the true story of Oscar Grant, who was shot by a police officer while restrained and while unarmed. The timing could not have been more perfect. What I found fascinating, watching this film, is I could see the places where we could judge Oscar: "Well, why did you even fight back with that guy?" "Why didn't you turn around when the police officer told you to?" "Why were you talking back?" etc etc. And that's when it hit me: Black male victims of prejudice are like rape victims. They are never seen as victims. First, they are questioned for performing actions that are natural in any other scenario: "Well, why was he even out there in the first place?...Why was he fighting back?...Why was she wearing a mini skirt?...Why was she drunk?" Of course the truth is, a woman should feel comfortable wearing whatever the fuck they want, without being blamed for a rape because she wore a mini skirt. And a black man should feel ok being annoyed when a police officer is roughing them up, since that is a natural reaction (See Occupy Wall Street-related videos of mostly white people being visibly annoyed at cops roughing them up). It is frightening that humans are inconsistent over who they show fairness/empathy towards. So long as we, as a society, choose not to protect women from the actions of rapists, and so long as we choose not to protect black men from the prejudices of others, we will continue living in an intensely ugly society where Trayvon Martin and Oscar Grant* are senselessly killed.

Monday, May 6, 2013

The unbelievably condescending letter below was featured in today's Dear Prudie post:

Q. High School Graduation: My son graduates from high school this month. There is a girl in the same school system who has severe cerebral palsy. She has been in the same schools as my son since kindergarten, and was mainstreamed into the classrooms; she even "graduated" along with the other kids in sixth grade. She is also a neighbor. Her parents are delightful, optimistic, friendly, and caring neighbors. But, as graduation approaches, the talk in the store when we meet other moms is always happy talk about college choices. Even this mom happily asks about other kids. I ran into her recently, and had this happy chat, but I felt self-conscious that I didn't know how to ask about her daughter. I know there must be sadness that her daughter does not have the hopeful future that our kids have. I want to be kind and honest when we visit. How should I handle this?

Prudie's response, while on point, did not sufficiently address, in our humble opinion, the insanity (arrogance?) dripping in the letter writer's question. We have therefore drummed up what we view to be a more appropriate response:

A. High School Graduation: How wonderful of you to care that the mother of this retarded human being does not have the hopeful future that your son has. Often times, we are worried about how others may accept our kind gestures and fail to act; therefore, I suggest that you bake a pie, knock on your neighbor's door and casually ask her, "how is Simple Jack doing?" Should she stab you, spit on you and throw you into an oncoming car, rest assured that this is undoubtedly the stress from raising someone who should have been put down by a seasoned and qualified Veterinarian a long time ago. And someone clearly from the lower classes. In addition, should your neighbors set you on fire upon retelling this delightful story, well, please be reminded that Hitler was once misunderstood as well.

Sunday, May 5, 2013

On April 30, 2013, the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) reduced to 15 years the minimum age of over-the-counter
access to emergency oral contraceptives, a/k/a the Morning After Pill. This
move, which does not conform to the recent ruling of U.S. District Judge Edward
Korman of New York that overturned the Obama Administration’s minimum age
requirement of 17 years, has set off the usual firestorm of debate on the
appropriateness of the Morning After Pill and its availability to
minors. I thought I would throw my hat in the ring to address some
frequently asked questions or comments on the Morning After Pill.

1. Children should ask their
parents for permission prior to purchasing the morning after pill.

We’ve all heard the comments that “my child knows
better” and “I would never judge my child”
and “I would make sure that my child knew
there was always a safe place for her to discuss all matters involving her
sexuality.” I am sure that most, if not all of us, understand the need
for parental involvement or supervision when children are making certain
decisions. Unfortunately, reality is such that not every child has a
safe space (or an adequate support system) to discuss the near-inevitable issue of her sexuality. We
live in a country that has created a taboo culture around the topic of sex, so
much so that a child often believes that addressing her sexuality and the hormones
naturally tumbling within her is off-limits. There are also those
children being raised in homes that may have religion-based values prohibiting
pre-marital sex, much less discussed.
Then there are those children that do not have a safe space because they
are living a nightmare where the counterpart to their sexual experiences is
their father, uncle, brother, or cousin, and a rapist.

Taking a step back, it is important to acknowledge that teenagers
are notoriously wary of authority and are wary of the potential for “punishment”
for even the most mundane things; therefore, it is unquestionable that they
would feel the same way about discussing their sexual activity with their
parents.

Furthermore, has anyone taken a look at our rape culture
or the tendency of our society to blame the victim and ask questions
later? No?

Yes, I’m pretty sure any child born to the above asshole (at a Take Back The Night Event, mind you) would feel comfortable coming to her
parents for help. Children need safe and educated options and,
sometimes, those options cannot be their parents.

I will also advance a potentially controversial
point: There actually is something to be said for having a healthy
fear of one’s parents. Too often, we see children not quite
understanding the concept that parents are there to be parents and not to be
your friends. Perhaps it IS okay that your child is not comfortable
coming to you to discuss their sexual habits or discuss that she decided not to use a
condom with her boyfriend/sexual partner the night before. What is not okay is that you have not educated your child enough to
teach her that there are places such as Planned Parenthood at which she could get some guidance on preventing STDs and unwanted
pregnancies, or that you failed to teach your child about contraceptives such that there shall be no need for emergency contraceptives.

2. What would stop an adult from
buying the drug for a 13-year old girl? No matter what the
minimum age for access to the Morning After Pill is, someone will always be
able to buy the pills for a 13 year old girl.
Take alcoholic beverages, for instance, a product that, unlike the
Morning After Pill, has actual and frequent evidence of its capacity for
destruction when abused. I will call you
a liar should you say you never had (or don’t know someone who had) a 21 year
old buy you alcohol as a teenager.
Either way, to be quite frank, I see absolutely nothing wrong with a 13
year old girl having a 15 year old buy her the Morning After Pill.

3. Abstinence-only programs are a
safer bet than making the pill available to 15 year olds. Abstinence-only
programs have proven repeatedly to be complete and total failures. Teenage pregnancies, which overall remain at
historically low levels, appear to be at their highest in States espousing abstinence-only programs. Finally,
contrary to oddly-popular opinion, providing the Morning After Pill to
teenagers shall not destroy the girl, and shall not lead her down a guaranteed
path of promiscuity, force her to drop out of high school, and etc. Do you know what would guarantee a changed life
for her? And almost always not for the
better? A teenage pregnancy.

4. Boys will now force unwitting
young females to take the pill. This is the most common and
frequent argument I have heard against the decision of the
FDA. Except, we’re forgetting something: This is not a
date rape drug. Where both parties are consenting, it is likelier
that both parties shall be making this decision together. If you
have a non-consenting girl, then I shall go out on a limb and say that you have
bigger problems than whether or not a boy slipped the Morning After Pill into a
girl’s drink.

5. Is it not likely that girls
will end up abusing the availability of the Morning After Pill, using it
inappropriately as a birth control device, and taking it 3 times or more per
month? A couple of things: (a) I strongly urge you to retake
Freshman biology, and (b) the Morning After Pill is actually $50 per month-
short of a child having access to one heck of an allowance (or other illegal
and/or non-sanctioned cash flow), may I guarantee you that this will not be the
case and shall be likelier a last resort?

6. We have regulations for things
from buying alcohol and cigarettes, to driving, etc. Why is it a big deal that
we regulate the access of kids to the morning after pill? See #1
above. Please let me know the last time that your teenager came to
you and said, hey, mom, I am going to Justin’s house to have sex. Teenagers do not ask for permission to have
sex and this is the reality. Provide
them with as many safe options to protect themselves.

7. The Morning After Pill is an
abortion pill. Sigh mother f*cking sigh. The Morning After Pill is
NOT an abortion pill because once a fertilized egg has been implanted in the
uterus, the pill cannot stop the development of the fetus. Rather, the Morning After Pill may prevent
ovulation (the release of the egg from the ovary) or prevent the fertilization
of the egg. In addition, the Morning
After Pill may prevent an egg from implanting in the uterine wall. For
further discussion, please see recommendation in No. 5 above re: Freshman
Biology.

8. The Morning After Pill will
lead to increased levels of promiscuity in teenagers. Yes,
because condoms, which are available without an age-limit, by the by, have led
to orgy ragers. In all seriousness, kids WILL have sex; I
promise you that. It is important to provide teenagers with
emergency contraceptives instead of finding yourself discussing adoption or
abortion or other options with them. I ask you to choose the better
option.

One does not read this blog without knowing that I am a fierce and unapologetic advocate for all matters involving the rights of women, especially when it comes to reproduction and our sexuality. When the Morning After Pill became widely available, I recall “abusing” its availability. At least twice (three times?) in one year, I purposely did not insist on a condom with my then sexual partner because I knew I had the option of the Morning After Pill. I share this anecdote because I am not writing off the possibility that teenagers may get comfortable and may become more reckless than usual. However, similar to my subsequent and very rapid education that the Morning After Pill really was not a form of birth control, I have quite a bit of faith and comfort that the “abusing” teenager quickly will learn the appropriate uses of the Morning After Pill. In the end, the job should be about educating the sexually active on the appropriate contraceptives so as to prevent the need for an emergency contraceptive.

9. And finally, tying back to No.
1 above, my child is an angel and knows to come to me. Go
check your teenager’s bedroom. Yes, that’s her bed sheet hanging out
the window. And yes, that’s Brad’s corvette parked down the block.